We have located links that may give you full text access.
Effects of different surface treatments on surface topography and bond strength in the repair of fiber-reinforced dentin composite.
Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry 2024 March 5
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the effects of different surface treatments on the repair bond strength between a fiber-reinforced dentin composite and a posterior composite.
METHODS: Forty fiber-reinforced dentin composite resin blocks (4 mm × 4 mm × 4 mm) were separated into eight groups (n = 5) according to the surface preparation methods: (G1) negative control group, (G2) adhesive application, (G3) 50% dimethylsulfoxide (DMSO) application, (G4) 50% DMSO + adhesive application, (G5) 37% phosphoric acid etch + adhesive application, (G6) air abrasion + adhesive application, (G7) 37% phosphoric acid etch + 50% DMSO application + adhesive application, and (G8) air abrasion +50% DMSO application + adhesive application group. The composite surfaces were repaired in two layers with a posterior composite. Composite sticks were subjected to a micro tensile bond strength (μTBS) test. Fractured surfaces were evaluated using a stereomicroscope (×25). Short fiber-reinforced composite samples' surfaces were investigated by scanning electron microscope (SEM). Shapiro Wilk, one-way ANOVA, and Tukey HSD tests were used for statistical evaluation.
RESULTS: The highest average (μTBS) values were observed in G8, whereas the lowest mean μTBS values were evident in the G1 group. Statistically significant μTBS values were found in all adhesive-applied groups when compared with the negative control group. Notably, the application of 50% DMSO without adhesive did not lead to a statistically significant increase in μTBS values. SEM images demonstrated that acid etching partially eliminated residues on the composite surface, while air abrasion had a detrimental effect on the integrity of fiber structures.
CONCLUSION: In the repair of fiber-reinforced dentin composite with a posterior composite, adhesive application is an effective approach. The treatment of 50% DMSO without adhesive did not confer a statistically significant advantage, and the supplemental use of acid etch or air abrasion did not show an additional benefit compared to adhesive-only repairs.
CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Adhesive application emerges as a potent and effective strategy for the repair of bur-roughened fiber-reinforced dentin composites. With its limitations, the study highlights the efficacy of adhesive-only repairs without the necessity for additional surface treatments.
METHODS: Forty fiber-reinforced dentin composite resin blocks (4 mm × 4 mm × 4 mm) were separated into eight groups (n = 5) according to the surface preparation methods: (G1) negative control group, (G2) adhesive application, (G3) 50% dimethylsulfoxide (DMSO) application, (G4) 50% DMSO + adhesive application, (G5) 37% phosphoric acid etch + adhesive application, (G6) air abrasion + adhesive application, (G7) 37% phosphoric acid etch + 50% DMSO application + adhesive application, and (G8) air abrasion +50% DMSO application + adhesive application group. The composite surfaces were repaired in two layers with a posterior composite. Composite sticks were subjected to a micro tensile bond strength (μTBS) test. Fractured surfaces were evaluated using a stereomicroscope (×25). Short fiber-reinforced composite samples' surfaces were investigated by scanning electron microscope (SEM). Shapiro Wilk, one-way ANOVA, and Tukey HSD tests were used for statistical evaluation.
RESULTS: The highest average (μTBS) values were observed in G8, whereas the lowest mean μTBS values were evident in the G1 group. Statistically significant μTBS values were found in all adhesive-applied groups when compared with the negative control group. Notably, the application of 50% DMSO without adhesive did not lead to a statistically significant increase in μTBS values. SEM images demonstrated that acid etching partially eliminated residues on the composite surface, while air abrasion had a detrimental effect on the integrity of fiber structures.
CONCLUSION: In the repair of fiber-reinforced dentin composite with a posterior composite, adhesive application is an effective approach. The treatment of 50% DMSO without adhesive did not confer a statistically significant advantage, and the supplemental use of acid etch or air abrasion did not show an additional benefit compared to adhesive-only repairs.
CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Adhesive application emerges as a potent and effective strategy for the repair of bur-roughened fiber-reinforced dentin composites. With its limitations, the study highlights the efficacy of adhesive-only repairs without the necessity for additional surface treatments.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
British Society for Rheumatology guideline on management of adult and juvenile onset Sjögren disease.Rheumatology 2024 April 17
Albumin: a comprehensive review and practical guideline for clinical use.European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology 2024 April 13
Renin-Angiotensin-Aldosterone System: From History to Practice of a Secular Topic.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 5
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app